Tymon said:
Well, for 40 Mil for getting a McDonalds employee fired, I'd probably toss the guy I just fucked a 100 Grand, save him 12.5 years of flipping burgers.
WTB: Screenshot from Cokken
- Thread starter Dejavu
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cokken screenshot wtb
Well, for 40 Mil for getting a McDonalds employee fired, I'd probably toss the guy I just fucked a 100 Grand, save him 12.5 years of flipping burgers.
Skaw said:
I'd seriously ponder a lot more than getting a McDonalds employee fired for 40mil.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 940
- Age
- 44
Elemmire said:
They are not breaking the law. They are viotating the EULA. Compairing gil sellers to crack dealers is like compairing Sev to Hitler. It is a complete over-reaction, and thats what gets me. I don't agree with sellers, but I also don't fault em for it. They don't fuck up the economy, and if you think they do, you need a few courses in macro-economics. And they certainly arn't the blight that illecit drug use is to people. So grow the fuck up
Dropping the cape just proves that he's not just out to screw people over.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 6,386
- Age
- 46
- Location
- Clarksville, TN
- Website
- www.gamefaqs.com
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- None
- FFXIV
- Rappa
Braydon said:
Godwin's Law. This thread can be closed now.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,555
- Age
- 42
- Location
- somewhere...
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- FFXI
- Dejavu
- FFXIV
- Won't play this game
I've never heard of that law before...
http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html
Thats hilarious.
http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html
Thats hilarious.
Braydon said:
Ya, gil sellers never had 100's of bots fishing all over the place for items they could NPC. They never farmed tigers 24/7 to trade in for the tiger fang quest. They never supplied people the gil to buy items or level crafts they would never be able to do.
I'm a go hang out with them, because they don't actually fuck anything up, they are the reason I play this game, I'm so glad you and Dumbstorm have shown me the light.
Hate to break the news to you junior, but you need that course in macro economics. What is Bill Gates worth? a few billion, I don't know the figure, but lets say we take a billion of his money. We give 10,000 people $100,000 (I think my math is right). Now the people we are giving this money to are poor. What do you think they are going to buy? The majority of these people are going to go out and buy a car. Do you think 10,000 new cars on the road by itself would change things? That is 10,000 more cars that will need oil changes, tires, maintenance.
Now these 10,000 people are gonna need some rimz and phat beatz for their pimped out ride. They are going to need some new clothes, shoes, all sorts of shit, 1 billion dollars pumped straight into our economy is big. You will be dealing with 10,000 people who are just spending money, and yes some of them will invest that money in a business or something, but plenty of that money will find itself passing hands to a cashier somewhere.
I'm willing to bet a number of the people who want to see the cape dropped:
1) enjoy the plot of Ocean's Eleven
2) do not spend any time in their daily lives helping the homeless or destitute
This may sound harsh, but I think it deserves real thought if you want to think about morality with regard to this issue.
If one person who has a subsistence life in a poverty stricken area was replaced by another as a punishment for a mistake, what moral responsibility does the original "con-man" have for the poor man's new situation? Doesn't he have an equal responsibility for the new source of income for the other man who now has a job at IGE or wherever?
QCDN'ers tend to reward hard work. The person who made a mistake seems to have lost a job [in this speculation] to someone else who now has a chance to prove himself. Why doesn't this principle apply here?
Finally, the original act dealt a blow to an organization that makes it harder for hard work to pay off. Why is this a moral problem to QCDN?
Isn't the gil of RMT'ers considered illegitimate to some degree? Ideally, wouldn't it all be back in the hands of players? If we could, without consequence, take it from them and give it to players, wouldn't we?
If so, why is the partial act a problem?
1) enjoy the plot of Ocean's Eleven
2) do not spend any time in their daily lives helping the homeless or destitute
This may sound harsh, but I think it deserves real thought if you want to think about morality with regard to this issue.
If one person who has a subsistence life in a poverty stricken area was replaced by another as a punishment for a mistake, what moral responsibility does the original "con-man" have for the poor man's new situation? Doesn't he have an equal responsibility for the new source of income for the other man who now has a job at IGE or wherever?
QCDN'ers tend to reward hard work. The person who made a mistake seems to have lost a job [in this speculation] to someone else who now has a chance to prove himself. Why doesn't this principle apply here?
Finally, the original act dealt a blow to an organization that makes it harder for hard work to pay off. Why is this a moral problem to QCDN?
Isn't the gil of RMT'ers considered illegitimate to some degree? Ideally, wouldn't it all be back in the hands of players? If we could, without consequence, take it from them and give it to players, wouldn't we?
If so, why is the partial act a problem?
Left out:
3) Think its good/funny that Peter LeFleur owns White Goodman's gym at the end of Dodgeball, even though White "let" LeFleur do it by putting the capability out there without being careful enough to watch it. (White Goodman, incidentally, was trying to stop the normal gym-goers from having a place to go to by buying out Average Joe's)
3) Think its good/funny that Peter LeFleur owns White Goodman's gym at the end of Dodgeball, even though White "let" LeFleur do it by putting the capability out there without being careful enough to watch it. (White Goodman, incidentally, was trying to stop the normal gym-goers from having a place to go to by buying out Average Joe's)
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2004
- Messages
- 2,496
- Age
- 40
- Location
- Georgia Tech
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Linkshell
- PheonixPimps
End of the day its jealusy they are desguising as self righteusness. Utter fucking bullshit really. They want to pretend like they have some morale high ground or something, every person who says this cape should be drop makes this RM seem more and more pathetic, trying to gloss over the fact that these bastards have been poisoning this game for years now. They are just pissed they lacked the ingenuity, cleverness, and above all sheer daring to pull of a stunt like this.
versiontwo said:
you lost ulli, maybe you should quit the game.
S
Sculli
Guest
If one is not in favor of RMT, then one could not possibly be in favor of taking gil and giving it to players. In both cases the receiving player didn't put in hard work to be deserving of the gil.Valoran said:
Or did I get the whole anti-rmt argument wrong?
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 940
- Age
- 44
meeze said:
First off, your last 2 paragraphs I don't where your going with this.
But, while I don't like sellers, I'm not gonna fuck over someone to try a right some fundemental evil I felt was was being commited. And if he want's to be Robin Hood, he has to give to the poor. You don't hear of Robin Hood keeping the shit he stole. Hence the drop, then no profits off of this percieved evil.
And guys, getting pissy over RMT is like debating Star War vs Star Trek. It's pointless.
Braydon said:
RMT distributes gil to players who would not have that gil. That affects our economy. They spend on items/crafts they would never without RMT.
Valoran said:
rofl :biggrin:
yanzi said:
Sculli said:
I really hope they ban you for being a retard.
versiontwo said:
i'm only drawing parallels between your post and another.
if you're too retarded to figure that out, god help you.